Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-02-09


knew it was 'alse when he wrote it. He is now
lurking ia the lobby, trying to antagonize the
substitute to the bill. This question was made
an issue in the last campaign He told the peo-
pie if a bill was given him for presentation he
should present it in the Assembly. For this he
received but few votes in the precincts most OPP
posed to division now-0rlaud, Butte City,
Princeton and Germantown. When argument
and reason fail to convince them, Mr..
Green seeks revenge through the columns
of his " chick-a-dee-dee press" Far be it from
me to question his veracity. will leave that
to my neighbors. Let them decide that ques-
ton as between myself and the man that Will
fes me. | am not afraid to face the truth.
When diyisioners came to me with so names,
they were entitled TO respectful consideration.
All they asked was TO be given an opportunity
to vote upon the question. Could there be Il
more modest, honorable and honest PROPOSE
ton from American people who desired home
rule? Mr.. Green is actuated by selfinterest.
He does the county printing. He is accustomed
to the dragging down or families and the dis
grazing OF children in the columns of his paper.
He makes some S. 900 or 81 1000 per year out of
county printing, which is the cause of his ami
mus He is not unknown to fame. He at one
time occupied seat upon the floor of this As
sembly, and introduced the most infamous
legislation-the Swamp Land Act. That rele
gated him TO the shade until he again turned up
in grand lofty and tumbling act in the San
Jose Convention when he again defeated the
will of the party in securing the nomination of
a Railroad Commissioner. had to arise to this
question OF privilege as matter of defense, not
Only 10 myself. Dut 10 my L rGlule all
his charges. and brand them as untrue.
THE MINERAL CABINET.
Taylor of Sacramento moved a reconsidera-
ton of the vote by which the bill was lost re-
moving the mineral cabinet from the State
Capitol to the rocker Art Gallery. The motion
prevailed, and the bill passed by vote of 81
ayes to noes.
THOSE INSURANCE BILLS
Brusie moved to re-refer to the Committee on
Corporations \. d. 26S, relative to insurance
companies.
Lawrence the author of the bill, who had
very bad cold and his hair parted i'll the mid
die, arose and spoke against the preference.
He claimed it was an aDti-monopoly bill, and II
the Committee on Corporations got 1t into their
hands they would smother it. His remarks and
the style OF their delivery was very offensive to
many OF the members.
Brusie of Amador said ! have not expressed
myself as being opposed TO this bill / have not
expressed myself us TO its merits, but do wish
to express myself az being opposed to sitting
here in my chair and submitting TO the dicta-
tions of some pot-house attorneys from the Po-
lice Court of San Francisco. / am tired OF the
raids made by these legislative pirates and
hope by this vote the members may express
themselves as being opposed TO them. Inc un-
due advantage taken by the enlightened Law
renee from San Francisco on this clneh meas
ure is sufficient cause to refer it. and the parlc
ular interest manifested on the part OF the sack
hunters society is enough 10 commend the ac-
ton asked for. This is not an action of opposi-
means employed by the gentleman nom san
Francisco in securing the coveted prlze
Mr.. Shanahan answered MI Bruse, stating
that while he regretted to differ with the able
gentleman from Amador, that certainly gentle
men on the floor should not be impelled to vote
for against bill in Il spirit of spite or re-
yenge as against the author of Il bill that every
bill should be acted upon on its merits that
while he was not certain that the bill should
pass it should not be smothered i'll committee.
Brooks was also opposed to the re-reierence
Ha
ways" of this Committee on Corporations. lie
sad he had pilot bill-a good bill, one that
should be enacted in the interest OF ihe whole
people. 1t was re-reierred 10 committee ana
had not since been heard OF.
Mr.. Alexander, of the Committee on Corpora-
TONS took the floor and made defense OF hsl
committee refuting the insinuati MS against i.
The committee was composed OF members who
were honest and sincere. who were working
hard with the bills before them, and they would
all be returned in due time He SAID 1t was Il TACT
well known to every one that hundreds OF bills
were introduced in the Legislature aimed mt
corporations for the sole and only purpose of
causing their representatives to come here and
fight their passage. The ammunition they use
bears the coat-ofarms of the Government, and
is solid and convincing.
After some further debate. the motion of re-
reference was lost, and the bill made special
order for tomorrow morning, Immediately alter
the reading of the journal.
4 petition was presented, signed by 500 resi-
dents of Humboldt county, asking that Con-
for the removal of the bar from the mouth OF
Eel river. Referred to Committee Oh Federal
Relations.
THAT PILOT BILL.
The Committee on commerce and Navigation
reported against the passage of A. B, |, relating
to the pilot regulations for San Francisco, Mare
Island and Benlcia.
Brooks, author of the bill, moved the suspen-
sion of the rules, and give the bill second
reading. He was very DESTROYS 10 have the bill
come once more before the House il for no
other reason than to ascertain who is lowering
around the House to endeavor to defeat Its pas
sage. He referred in the most denunciatory
manner to the monayed lobby and the members
that countenanced them
Hyde spoke for upwards OF an hour against
the taking up of the bill, and said it was II CON
test between Il foreign tugboat company and
home pilots, and he was opposed to the cutting
of the latters wages.
Afternoon Session.
After access the reconsideration of the vote
whereby a. C. r. !, relative to the exemption
from taxation of growing fruit trees and vines.
was considered.
Wilcox made a strong plea in favor OF its pas
sage.
mood, and sarcastic and funny speeches were
made by Briefly. Mathews of Tehama, Lewis
and others. The amendment was lost.
The pilot bin discussion was again taken up.
and Mr. La Blanc spoke in favor ofthe bill, and
read from statistics showing the pilot charges in
san Francisco harbor to be the largest in the
United States. Boston and Baltimore were
practically free ports. The grain-growers of
California were taxed $4,000 to put their grain
on the ocean
Brooks made strong argument in favor OF
the passage of his bill. Many of the pilots re
ceive $3.50 per month. wore plug hats diamonds,
carried g0ld-hesded canes and were ''grandees.
He said similar bill was presented at former
session of the Legislature, but the pilot ring
boosted that they defeated its passage by Il cor
rlpt use of $4,000. He advised members OF the
House who were for sale, or intended to sell out.
to demand a good round price-slltficient amount
to allow them to spend the balance OF their
days in foreign parts.
The discussion lasted until go P. NJ, when a
vote was taken under motion of the previous
question, and the bill reconsidered.
THAT LIBEL BILL.
At this point of the debate Alexander took the
floor and moved Il reconsideration OF the vote
whereby A. i. 1875, relative to damages Tor libel
or SANDER, had on Monday been refused a
second reading. There was an effort to persuade
Mr.. Alexander to withhold his motion until
after the pilot bill was disposed of Fearing
that the enemies of the libel bill would force an
adjournment and thus kill it, If delayed too
long. Mr. Alexander claimed his right and
would not yield.
Speaker Jordan called Mr.. Venable to the
chair and taking the floor, defended the bill
said it was right and proper measure, and
should be enacted. He spoke for upwards OF
half an hour reviewed the workings OF the
present statute in of libel, and pointed out
the many advantages to be gained by the enact !
ment OF the proposed law =.
MCGOWAN, the author of the bill, Knox, Sims
and Variel also made strong and eloquent argu-
ments in favor OF the reconsideration OF the bill
and its enactment On the other side equal
as able and eloquent speeches were made by
Rennison, Wright, Brooks. Briefly and Coolnbs;
The latter was extremely hostile TO the Dill, ana
said its passage would be moth ng short OF in
famous LEGISLATION.
The proposed bill reads: "When breach of
duty has caused no appreciable detriment TO
the party affected he may yet recover nominal
damages. In cases of libel and SANDER, nomi-
mai damages only can be recovered, unless the
party charged with the publication OF the libel
or utterance of the SANDER shall have refused
or n. elected for a period of fifteen days after
written demand, to retraet or correct such libel
or SANDER prorided that such demand for such
retraction or correction shall have been made
within Thirty days after such publication or
utterance.
At GAO p NJ the House adjourned.